If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

It means the Holy Spirit. I have the testimony of the Holy Spirit on this matter. That's what I mean by spiritual source.

So this just means that you've set yourself up in such a position that you can't be challenged, for in disagreeing with you I'm in effect disagreeing with God! So sin does not play a part in your life such that you may be wrong on something, or that dialogue is need to weigh truth from error? So I see the link: the Holy Spirit has told you what the name is, so you don't need to deal with any conflicting evidence that I've continued to raise? I'm challenging the unchallengable because you've unfortunately set yourself up as a prophet on the matter.

Everyone who is actually indwelt by the Holy Spirit knows that God has preserved his written Word in the Received Text, and that the Received Text is the very Text that Jesus used, that Paul used, that Peter used, that the Reformers used, and so on.

Thus, if a person who has even a rather basic knowledge of this issue actually rejects the Received Text, you may be INFALLIBLY certain that such a man is not born again.

That is simply not true. Every Christian will have areas of inconsistency and sin in their life until the resurrection of the dead. But their salvation does not depend on their own efforts or their view on the Received Text, but by their faith in Jesus' death and resurrection for them (Rom 3:21-26; 4:24-25).

I strongly encourage you once again to read the two articles I directed you to earlier. Here they are again --

Sure I read them and I find them to be exceedingly unhelpful. I wish you would withdraw them, in fact, because they're potentially disasterous for some people to read. It is not whether someone can recount some over-the-top subjective conversion experience which testifies whether they are a Christian or not, but whether they are currently trusting Jesus' death and resurrection for them. You seem to have made your own conversion experience to be normative for every other Christian. However, I prefer personally to trust in Jesus' death and resurrection for me for the source of my salvation, not in the "type" of my conversion experience. For how much does one have to "feel" before it is to be evaluated by you as a "true" conversion? Indeed, such a view would rule out young children and the mentally ill from salvation, for they are not able to recount such an experience. In my own experience, very few people can witness to the exact moment which you expect; but this does not make them more or less a Christian since their status before God rests not in themselves but in the work of God in Jesus' death and resurrection which they put their trust and confidence in.

So I see the link: the Holy Spirit has told you what the name is, so you don't need to deal with any conflicting evidence that I've continued to raise?

You don't even know what evidence is, much less how to analyze it. The fact that you are too feeble-minded to understand what AS IT IS WRITTEN actually means, is completely revealing.

Nor does the significance of the fact that you and the others who hold your position were so ignorant of this issue that you didn't even know the Tetragrammaton was pronounced, for if you actually understood the SIGNIFICANCE of the FACT that the Tetragrammon actually WAS pronounced -- indeed, if you actually understood the SIGNIFICANCE of that FACT -- you would understand just how untenable your position is.

It may take awhile, but others who think it through and who come to understand the SIGNIFICANCE of the FACT that the Tetragrammaton was actually pronounced will by this one point alone come to see your folly in toto.

Originally Posted by David Kummerow

That is simply not true. Every Christian will have areas of inconsistency and sin in their life until the resurrection of the dead. But their salvation does not depend on their own efforts or their view on the Received Text, but by their faith in Jesus' death and resurrection for them (Rom 3:21-26; 4:24-25).

I see once again that in the first part of your allegation you have erected a strawman instead of addressing what I actually stated. Here's a clue for you -- I never once stated that a person's salvation hinged on their view of the Received Text. Once again, your mind just isn't working.

And all you keep doing with your many statements is demonstrate that you haven't a clue as to how the Holy Spirit operates. Not a CLUE. Born again Christians can tell very well how the Holy Spirit operates, and there is a common pool in the Spirit's operation among those he indwells, and not ONE truly regenerate person is ignorant of it. Not one.

Originally Posted by David Kummerow

Sure I read them and I find them to be exceedingly unhelpful. I wish you would withdraw them, in fact, because they're potentially disasterous for some people to read. It is not whether someone can recount some over-the-top subjective conversion experience which testifies whether they are a Christian or not, but whether they are currently trusting Jesus' death and resurrection for them.

I don't doubt you found the articles unhelpful. But no, I won't remove them because other people have found Jesus Christ in them. Moreover, the countless number of men I quote in those papers also knew that a professed salvation without a MANIFEST SUPERNATURAL EXPERIENCE is a counterfeit salvation, and, like Spurgeon said, and as all the others echoed, if there isn't something SUPERNATURAL about your religion it will be a millstone about your neck to sink you into hell for all eternity.

Originally Posted by David Kummerow

I prefer personally to trust in Jesus' death and resurrection for me for the source of my salvation, not in the "type" of my conversion experience. For how much does one have to "feel" before it is to be evaluated by you as a "true" conversion? Indeed, such a view would rule out young children and the mentally ill from salvation, for they are not able to recount such an experience. In my own experience, very few people can witness to the exact moment which you expect; but this does not make them more or less a Christian since their status before God rests not in themselves but in the work of God in Jesus' death and resurrection which they put their trust and confidence in.

Sorry, but this, along with so much else you've written, just shows that you know absolutely nothing of the supernatural miracle of the new birth.

Moreover, those of us who are saved don't actually trust in Jesus' death and resurrection; rather, we trust in Jesus HIMSELF, and as ALL genuinely born again Christians know, the difference between the two is greater than the span of the universe. I realize you don't understand that or know what it truly means, but it's a fact.

Next, you say, "very FEW people can witness to the exact moment," but isn't that a coincidence? Hmm.

Jesus Christ taught it is FEW that shall be saved; and then you say very FEW can witness to the exact moment. Yes, some "coincidence" indeed.

You've just refuted yourself and you don't even know it. And Jesus will be shown to have told the truth on judgment day.

Furthermore, genuine men of God, such as Whitefield, Spurgeon, Bunyan, and others all taught that the truly born again Christian CAN and DOES "witness to the exact moment", and the fact is, (excluding babies, naturally, which I would have thought you would have understood, but alas), but the fact is, he who CANNOT "witness to the exact moment" is he who is deluding himself if he thinks he's born again.

Your own words repeatedly testify against you. You apparently don't understand the warnings of Pink as given in my article, nor do you have even a CLUE that saving faith is a SUPERNATURAL faith given from above, not a fleshly faith, nor an act of the will, and once again, you apparently did not understand Spurgeon one iota when he made a strong comment in my article on this very matter.

I could go on, but it's not worthwhile at this point, except to say that you also don't have a clue as to what constitutes false faith, fleshly faith, which will cause Jesus to say to countless multitudes who thought they believed in Jesus, "I never knew you".

And so yes, and unfortunately for you at this point, EVERY genuinely born again Christian can "witness to the exact moment," and he who can't will not set foot in the kingdom of Jesus Christ.

David, for what it's worth I appreciate the demonstration of two things in this thread.

1) The demonstration of your knowledge of the Hebrew language. I always learn when I read your posts. For this content, thanks for posting. Please don't stop.

2) Your demonstration of mature Christian conduct. I have to say, I cringed every time you added another post. I couldn't see how it would benefit you. But now, in the long run, I see crystal clear. It benefited others. Thanks!

A classic example of arguing a position in place of defending the truth?

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I think I remember you stating that you are an adherent of the Received Text.

If so, then that means you believe the Received Text goes back to the Second Temple Period.

The Tetragrammaton in the Received Text AS IT IS WRITTEN is pronounced YEHOVAH.

"In the TEMPLE they pronounced the Divine Name AS IT IS WRITTEN, but in the country by its substitute." Mishna - Tamid 7:2, Talmud - Tamid 33b

This means, if you believe the Received Text goes back to the Second Temple period, that when the Priest and the Rabbis PRONOUNCED the Divine Name AS IT IS WRITTEN in the Temple in the Second Temple period, they pronounced it as YEHOVAH, for that is EXACTLY how IT IS WRITTEN in the Received Text.

Of course, if you don't believe the Received Text goes back to the Second Temple period, then you don't have to believe that they pronounced the Tetragrammaton this way.

But then, all you have left is the "scholarly guess" of modern biblical scholars who were so ignorant of this issue that they didn't even know that the Tetragrammaton was pronounced at all.

YHWH Y=Yod, H=Hey, W = Wow, H = He

YHWH is pronounced:
Y=Yod,
H=Hey,
W = Wow,
H = He

Broken down through history is has been translated to
YHWH
Yodheywohe
Yohewhe
Yahweh

In the original Hebrew writing there were no vowels on written text although vowels were spoken, not written so if I were to write the word "pronounced" as the english written hebrew format is would be spellt as PRNNCD, due to a mix of superstition and a misunderstanding of how to translate the name resulted in the pruduction of such rendetions as mixing the name of God with the vowles from the name Addonai (Lord)
to make = Yahowah

Which has been altered by the English around 400 years ago to make the word Jehovah. even though there is no "J" sound in Hebrew which they completely changed from the "Y", also changing the "W" lettering and sound to a distinctive "V". Hova In Hebrew is actually Howa and Howa (1943 'Strongest Strongs Concordance') or Hawwa however pronounced, means = ruin, evil, desire or craving, destruction, corruption, calamity, wickednes, mischief, iniquity (lawlessness), calamity, perverse, woe.

Shocking I know...

God has none of those qualities and therefore His name CANNOT be Jehovah it as if the Hova in Jehovah means those things above which they indeed do it sounds more like it connotates the devil than it could ever God.

So as for Yahowah and Definately Jehovah; This is a mistranslation from mixing a rererence name of God Addonai (which means Lord and refers only to God but IS NOT God's actual name) and mixing it with the name of God which he spoke to Moses on the mountain from the Burning Bush which means '"I AM"' '"YHWE"' is the third person form of '"I AM"' literally meaning HE IS, aka HE IS: The everpresent One the Eternal God who is outside of time and always has, is, and will be, as He always IS BEEN, never had a beginning and never an end, the Omnipotent Omniscient Omnipresent Benevolent Holy God who is all in all and in all, who spoke the first and last words framing the bounderises of time and space itself, the Perfect never changing, The Great I AM, The Lord, GOD.

Notwithstanding the nonsense in the preceding post, here is just another piece of information for those who might actually be interested in the truth of this matter. The following partial quote was just posted on b-hebrew a few days ago in response to the Roman Catholic declaration that Rome will now no longer pronounce the Tetragrammaton --

"This is interesting, especially when not all Yuhudhim refrain from using the name of Yohowah. There are some of us, who refuse to replace the name of our deity with descriptive pronouns during our readings of the Torah, due to the fact that we think if the name is written within the text of the Torah, then when reading the Torah, in silent or aloud, we are to pronounce the name. There are also some of us, who think that during prayer we should make an effort to use the name of Yohowah. There are also some of us, who like are ancestors think we should greet and bless each other in the name of Yohowah. I happen to be one who follows the above standard."

However, again that is not evidence for the originality of the pronunciation "Yehovah", so it adds nothing to the debate.

It just further demonstrates the rapt ignorance of modern biblical scholarship who ignorantly asserted that the Tetragrammaton is not pronounced at all, an ignorant assertion that has been repeated ad nauseam by Hebrew teachers who should have known better.

With regard to YEHOVAH, the evidence is utterly conclusive that in the Received Text the Tetragrammton is pronounced as YEHOVAH, which is EXACTLY how IT IS WRITTEN in the Received Text, and which is exactly how the Jews I have known have PRONOUNCED it, notwithstanding the rapt ignorance of modern biblical scholars who ignorantly asserted that the Tetragrammton was not pronounced at all.